T.B. III v. N.B. and State of Missouri, Department of Social Services, Family Support Division
2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1309
Mo. Ct. App.2015Background
- Child born in 2000; T.B. signed an affidavit acknowledging paternity and consented to a 2001 administrative/court paternity order and child-support obligations based on Mother's representation that he was the father.
- In 2010 Mother told T.B. he was not the biological father; T.B. ordered DNA testing June 3, 2010, which (per his filing) excluded him as the biological father.
- T.B. filed a petition for declaration of non-paternity on August 27, 2012, attaching DNA results and alleging Mother’s fraud; trial court found Mother had committed extrinsic fraud but denied relief as time-barred.
- Trial court applied the special paternity statute, Section 210.854, but tolled its deadlines under Section 516.280, concluding discovery occurred June 11, 2010, and T.B.’s 2012 filing was untimely; trial court also denied Rule 74.06(b)/(d) relief for procedural reasons.
- On appeal, the court considered whether Section 210.854’s limitation can be tolled by general fraud-tolling statute, whether Rule 74.06(b) or (d) provided relief, and whether T.B. was free of fault or inattention.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Section 210.854’s time limit can be tolled by Section 516.280 (fraudulent concealment) | Tolling applies; limitations did not run until T.B actually received DNA results in 2012 | Section 210.854 is a special statute with its own deadlines and cannot be tolled by general limitations statutes | Court: Section 210.854 cannot be tolled by Section 516.280; special statute controls and precludes tolling |
| If tolling applied, whether T.B. discovered fraud in June 2010 (making 2012 filing untimely) | Discovery did not occur until DNA results were released in May 2012 | T.B. discovered fraud in 2010 when Mother told him and when he sent samples in June 2010 | Court: even assuming tolling, discovery occurred by June 2010, so 2012 filing was too late |
| Whether Rule 74.06(b) (relief from judgment for fraud) provides relief | Equitable relief available due to Mother’s extrinsic fraud | Rule 74.06(b) relief must be sought within one year of judgment; 2001 judgment makes 2012 motion untimely | Court: Rule 74.06(b) claim barred by one-year time limit; denied |
| Whether Rule 74.06(d) (independent equitable action for extrinsic fraud) allows relief "at any time" despite delays | Rule 74.06(d) permits relief for extrinsic fraud regardless of statutory deadlines | Even under Rule 74.06(d), plaintiff must be free of fault/neglect; T.B. failed to plead/prove freedom from inattention | Court: Rule 74.06(d) is available in principle, but T.B. failed to show he was free of fault or inattention and his >2-year delay barred equitable relief; petition denied |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. State Dept. of Social Servs., Family Support Div. v. Campbell, 386 S.W.3d 229 (Mo. App. W.D.) (describing Section 210.854 as creating a time-limited right to set aside paternity judgments)
- State ex rel. Bier v. Bigger, 178 S.W.2d 347 (Mo. 1944) (special statutes of limitation are not tolled by general doctrines of fraud or concealment)
- Frazee v. Partney, 314 S.W.2d 915 (Mo.) (a special statute of limitations must carry its own exceptions; courts may not engraft additional exceptions)
- McKarnin v. McKarnin, 795 S.W.2d 436 (Mo. App. W.D.) (Rule 74.06(d) independent equitable action for extrinsic fraud may be brought "at any time")
- State ex rel. Div. of Child Support Enforcement v. Hill, 53 S.W.3d 137 (Mo. App. W.D.) (mother’s out-of-court misrepresentations about paternity can amount to extrinsic fraud and support Rule 74.06(d) relief)